1. Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano – Dental Clinic IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, 20161 Milan, Italy
+1
Prof. Dr. Silvio Taschieri
1. Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano – Dental Clinic IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, 20161 Milan, Italy
In oral biology, tissue engineering aims at regenerating functional tissues through a series of key events that occur during alveolar/periodontal tissue formation and growth, by means of scaffolds that deliver signaling molecules and cells. Due to their excellent physicochemical properties and biomimetic features, nanomaterials are attractive alternatives offering many advantages for stimulating cell growth and promoting tissue regeneration through tissue engineering. The main aim of this article was to review the currently available literature to provide an overview of the different nano-scale scaffolds as key factors of tissue engineering for alveolar bone regeneration procedures. In this narrative review, PubMed, Medline, Scopus and Cochrane electronic databases were searched using key words like “tissue engineering”, “regenerative medicine”, “alveolar bone defects”, “alveolar bone regeneration”, “nanomaterials”, “scaffolds”, “nanospheres” and “nanofibrous scaffolds”. No limitation regarding language, publication date and study design was set. Hand-searching of the reference list of identified articles was also undertaken. The aim of this article was to give a brief introduction to review the role of different nanoscaffolds for bone regeneration and the main focus was set to underline their role for alveolar bone regeneration procedures.
14 December 2015 in Journal of Investigative and Clinical Dentistry
Background: The aim of this review was to evaluate the adjunctive effect of autologous platelet concentrates (APCs) for the treatment of furcation defects, in terms of scientific quality of the clinical trials and regeneration parameters assessment. Methods: A systematic search was carried out in the electronic databases MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and EMBASE, together with hand searching of relevant journals. Two independent reviewers screened the articles yielded in the initial search and retrieved the full-text version of potentially eligible studies. Relevant data and outcomes were extracted from the included studies. Risk of bias assessment was also carried out. The outcome variables, relative to baseline and post-operative defect characteristics (probing pocket depth (PPD), horizontal and vertical clinical attachment loss (HCAL, VCAL), horizontal and vertical furcation depth (HFD, VFD) were considered for meta-analysis. Results: Ten randomized trials were included in this review. Only one study was judged at high risk of bias, while seven had a low risk, testifying to the good level of the evidence of this review. The meta-analysis showed a favorable effect regarding all outcome variables, for APCs used in adjunct to open flap debridement (p < 0.001). Regarding APCs in adjunct to bone grafting, a significant advantage was found only for HCAL (p < 0.001, mean difference 0.74, 95% CI 0.54, 0.94). The sub-group analysis showed that both platelet-rich fibrin and platelet-rich plasma in adjunct with open flap debridement, yielded significantly favorable results. No meta-analysis was performed for APCs in combination with guided tissue regeneration (GTR) as only one study was found. Conclusion: For the treatment of furcation defects APCs may be beneficial as an adjunct to open flap debridement alone and bone grafting, while limited evidence of an effect of APCs when used in combination with GTR was found.
Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the virus responsible for the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) that emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, and rapidly spread worldwide, with a daily increase in confirmed cases and infection-related deaths. The World Health Organization declared a pandemic on the 11th of March 2020. COVID-19 presents flu-like symptoms that become severe in high-risk medically compromised subjects. The aim of this study was to perform an updated overview of the treatments and adjuvant protocols for COVID-19. Methods: A systematic literature search of databases was performed (MEDLINE PubMed, Google Scholar, UpToDate, Embase, and Web of Science) using the keywords: “COVID-19”, “2019-nCoV”, “coronavirus” and “SARS-CoV-2” (date range: 1 January 2019 to 31st October 2020), focused on clinical features and treatments. Results: The main treatments retrieved were antivirals, antimalarials, convalescent plasma, immunomodulators, corticosteroids, anticoagulants, and mesenchymal stem cells. Most of the described treatments may provide benefits to COVID-19 subjects, but no one protocol has definitively proven its efficacy. Conclusions: While many efforts are being spent worldwide in research aimed at identifying early diagnostic methods and evidence-based effective treatments, mass vaccination is thought to be the best option against this disease in the near future.
Diabetes is an important modifying factor of periodontitis, but its association with peri-implant diseases has not been fully explored and the existing literature reports controversial results. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the influence of diabetes on peri-implantitis and implant failure. Smoking status, history of periodontal disease, presence of diabetes, diabetes type, therapy and glycaemia levels were collected in a total of 204 subjects treated with 929 implants, with a mean follow-up time of 5.7 ± 3.82 years after loading. Odds ratio (OR) for diabetes as a direct cause of peri-implantitis and implant failure were calculated, adjusted for smoking status and history of periodontitis. Nineteen patients were diabetic and most of them presented a good control of the disease at the time of surgery. The overall patient-level prevalence of peri-implantitis was 11.3%. Among diabetic patients, one developed peri-implantitis, whereas one experienced multiple implant failures. The calculated ORs, adjusted for smoking status and periodontitis, were not statistically significant. The results revealed no association between diabetes and peri-implantitis or implant failure coherently with the existing scientific literature. The actual influence of hyperglycemia on implant failure is still uncertain and new studies with larger cohorts of patients are needed.